[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: IceCat stability vs Firefox Linux/Windows

From: Giuseppe Scrivano
Subject: Re: IceCat stability vs Firefox Linux/Windows
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:24:22 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)

Hi Dmitri,

the binaries you downloaded were compiled on Debian unstable, crashes
can be caused by different dynamic libraries found on your computer.

Usually Firefox/IceCat are very stable and don't crash so often.  In any
case they don't crash more often on GNU/Linux than on Windows.  If it
happens with Firefox too maybe the reason is a bugged library, are you
sure that your system is updated?

I read about your connection problems but if it is possible to you,
please download the source code and try to compile it, I am quite sure
you will solve your problems in this way or at least make IceCat stable
as Firefox (they both can't do anything if the problem is in another


Dmitri Gabinski <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi!
> I've recently discovered IceCat, downloaded and installed (actually,
> just unpacked) on openSUSE Linux 10.3. The first version I've used was
> 3.0.1, now it's 3.0.2. I also use Firefox 3.0.1 on openSUSE and
> Firefox 3.0.3 on Windows 2000 on the same machine, and Firefox 3.0.3
> on Windows XP on another machine.
> The matter is that with one particular site (www.loveplanet.ru) IceCat
> shows much worse stability as compared to Firefox. In fact, clicking
> almost any link there results in crashes of IceCat in 50% of cases. FF
> on Linux crashes sometimes, and on Windows almost never.
> Questions:
> 1) Is that about IceCat vs Firefox, or Linux vs Windows?
> 2) How can I make a good bug report? Is there any guidance available
> specific for IceCat? I realize, the information, I've provided, is of
> no big value as such, but I haven't had any experience with testing
> browsers. With other application types, you can submit a test case
> document, but with browsers you can't you just provide a link,
> right? And I can't say, any particular link ensures 100% repeatable
> crashes, just in, yes, 50% of cases.
> Best regards,
> Dmitri Gabinski

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]